[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 32 (Monday, March 21, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[Congressional Record: March 21, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION GREAT LAKES
IMPROVEMENTS ACT
Mr. STUDDS. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 1394) to improve coordination of National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration Great Lakes activities, as amended.
The Clerk read as follows:
H.R. 1394
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration Great Lakes Improvements Act''.
SEC. 2. GREAT LAKES OFFICE.
(a) Establishment.--The Under Secretary may establish and
maintain within the Administration a Great Lakes Office in
the Washington, District of Columbia area.
(b) Purpose.--The purpose of the Great Lakes Office shall
be to promote and coordinate Administration research,
monitoring, and assessment work in the Great Lakes region
consistent with the goals of the Great Lakes Water Quality
Agreement.
(c) Director.--The Director of the Great Lakes Office shall
be an individual with extensive knowledge and expertise in
the Great Lakes ecosystem, and with appropriate
administrative experience.
SEC. 3. GREAT LAKES REPORT.
(a) Contents.--Subject to the availability of
appropriations under section 5 of this Act, the Under
Secretary, in consultation with the Director of the Great
Lakes Office if established, shall prepare and submit to
Congress an annual Great Lakes Report. The Report shall
provide information relating to Great Lakes ecosystem
research, monitoring, and assessment, including--
(1) the individual activities, projects, or proposals
conducted by the Administration in the previous fiscal year,
including a summary of funds expended in support of these
activities, projects, or proposals;
(2) the amount of funds received from the Administration by
each State or local government unit bordering the Great
Lakes;
(3) the amount of funds received by individuals or
institutions residing or located within a State bordering the
Great Lakes;
(4) an inventory of Administration facilities and personnel
located in a State bordering the Great Lakes or in the Great
Lakes used to conduct or support Administration-funded
activities, projects, or proposals in the Great Lakes,
including vessels;
(5) the proposed Administration activities, projects, and
proposals to benefit the Great Lakes ecosystem for the
current fiscal year, including requested funds; and
(6) a proposal for increasing the presence of the
Administration in the Great Lakes, and improving the
coordination of research within the Administration and with
other entities, including the Government of Canada.
(b) Deadline.--Subject to the availability of
appropriations under section 5 of this Act, the Under
Secretary shall submit the Great Lakes Report to Congress by
October 1 of 1995, 1996, 1997, and 1998.
SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act--
(1) the term ``Administration'' means the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration;
(2) the term ``Great Lakes'' means--
(A) Lake Erie, Lake Huron, Lake Michigan, Lake Ontario, and
Lake Superior;
(B) their connecting waters, including the St. Marys River,
the St. Clair River, Lake St. Clair, the Detroit River, and
the Niagara River; and
(C) the St. Lawrence River;
(3) the term ``Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement'' means
the bilateral agreement between the United States and Canada
which was signed in 1978 and amended by the Protocol of 1987;
and
(4) the term ``Under Secretary'' means the Under Secretary
of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere.
SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There is authorized to be appropriated to the Under
Secretary to carry out this Act $100,000 for each of the
fiscal years 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, and 1998.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Massachusetts [Mr. Studds] will be recognized for 20 minutes, and the
gentleman from Texas [Mr. Fields] will be recognized for 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Studds].
Mr. STUDDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
(Mr. STUDDS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. STUDDS. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1394 was introduced by Mr. Stupak to
establish, within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[NOAA], a Great Lakes Office in the Washington, DC area.
One may ask why a Great Lakes Office in Washington, DC? Would not
Kalamazoo be better? In a word, no. The purpose of this office would be
to promote and coordinate activities of national programs that conduct
research, monitoring, and environmental assessment in the Great Lakes
region. These programs at NOAA and other agencies are managed from the
national capitol area. The bill also requires an annual report to
Congress on NOAA activities in the Great Lakes.
This bill unanimously passed the Merchant Marine and Fisheries
Committee last week, and I urge the House to adopt it.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FIELDS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
(Mr. FIELDS of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
Mr. FIELDS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in qualified support of this
bill.
While I concede that the Great Lakes are a tremendous national and
international resource--almost on a par with the Gulf of Mexico--I do
not feel that a Washington, DC-based regional office to coordinate and
promote the Great Lakes work of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration [NOAA] is necessary.
When Congressman Bob Davis introduced an identical measure in 1991, I
understand he was expressing his frustration that NOAA had failed to
establish a Great Lakes Research Office as required under section 118
of the Clean Water Act. However, NOAA established this office in
January 1993, at the Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory in
Ann Arbor. Therefore, the need for the office is much less pressing.
I also question the costs involved. The President's fiscal year 1995
budget cuts NOAA's coastal and ocean programs significantly. In fact,
two programs specific to the Great Lakes, the Great Lakes Environmental
Research Laboratory and the National Sea Grant College zebra mussel
initiative, are sliced by over $3.6 million. I think our first priority
is to restore these programs and ensure that valuable research,
environmental assessment, and navigation aids continue in the Great
Lakes. The money would be better spent there than on desks and paper
clips in Washington, DC.
However, the version of the bill reported from the Merchant Marine
and Fisheries Committee is much improved. It leaves to the NOAA
Administrator the decision to establish a Great Lakes Office. This is
an appropriate exercise of executive authority. In addition, the
detailed NOAA Great Lakes report to Congress is now subject to
appropriations and limited to 4 years. Given the proliferation of
reporting requirements, and NOAA's spotty track record for producing
timely and useful reports, I believe these are fair limitations.
With these changes, I ask my colleagues to support H.R. 1394 as
reported by the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries.
Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 1394, a bill
to improve the coordination of National Oceanographic and Atmospheric
Administration Great Lakes activities. I would like to thank the House
leadership, as well as Chairmen Ortiz and Studds, for moving
expeditiously to have this bill considered in the Subcommittee on
Oceanography, the full Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee, and
finally on the floor of the House.
H.R. 1394 would create a Washington, DC,-based NOAA Great Lakes
office to coordinate and promote Great Lakes activities within NOAA.
The creation of such an office would improve NOAA's credibility with
the Great Lakes scientific and resource management communities and
provide a much needed focus on the unique aquatic environmental
problems confronting the Great Lakes. Other agencies such as the
Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
have such coordinating offices for the Great Lakes. Given NOAA's
important role in the basin, I believe the creation of such an office
is long overdue.
The Great Lakes region faces a number of important challenges which
require direct attention. These problems include toxic pollution of the
water, contaminated sediments, fish and wildlife abnormalities,
fluctuating water levels, and the infestation of exotic aquatic species
such as sea lamprey, zebra mussels and the European ruffe.
The moneys associated with this proposal are minimal and the benefits
that would result from enactment of this bill are substantial. Mr.
Speaker, it is time for the Great Lakes to receive the attention they
deserve. I urge the House to pass H.R. 1394 and allow NOAA to more
efficiently tackle the problems that confront the Great Lakes.
Mr. ORTIZ. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to revise and extend
my remarks.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1394, the NOAA Great Lakes Improvement Act,
authorizes NOAA to establish a Great Lakes office in Washington. The
purpose of this office would be to promote and coordinate Federal
research, monitoring, and assessment work in the Great Lakes region.
The bill also directs NOAA to submit to Congress an annual report
providing information relating to Great Lakes ecosystem research,
monitoring, and assessment.
I have worked closely on this matter with the author of the bill, Mr.
Stupak, and I want to commend the gentleman for his spirit of
cooperation in this regard, and I urge my colleagues to support the
bill.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. FIELDS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. STUDDS. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Studds] that the House suspend the
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 1394, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________